Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Economies of Scale, Distribution of Industry and Programming
Economies of Scale, Distribution of Industry and Programming
Jagdish Bhagwati ("Economies of Scale, Distribution of Industry and Programming The Economic
Weekly, September 1, 1962) poses certain problems relating to the technical and the political processes of
planning in India, which need deeper analysis than attempted by him.
Bhagwati's criticism is that licences for industries are given without taking note of various economies,
like those of scale or of spacing, and the solution he presents is to work out national industrial targets in-
to economic project reports according to which Industrial plants would be set up.
There is an implied assumption in Jagdish Bhagwatis argument — that there is a technically fixed
optimum Location and scale for each Industry (vide his examples of cars, refrigerators, paper and so on). In
fact, there are two fallacies here.
Firstly, the manufacture of none of these products can be said to constitute a separate "industry''.
Secondly, scale or location are not technically "fixed" — even over the myopic horizon over which
alone planners do, or can be expected to, plan.
MANY of the products cited by Need for Conceptual Clarity as also the lack of competition in
Jagdish Bhagwati are not To be able to do this, it w o u l d also the economy. In fact, the G o v e r n
" p r o d u c t s " , but composites of pro- be necessary f o r planners a n d some ment have in m a n y cases (for
ducts ( o r sub-products, i f B h a g w a t i economists to c l a r i f y notions on example, paper plants in the first
so l i k e s ) . Cars and refrigerators economies of scale, location, and so two P l a n s ) set down minimum
are assemblies of products from o n . T h e r e is not, in real life tech- sizes f o r plants allowed to be set
different i n d u s t r i a l groups (electrical nology, a single technically fixed up — a policy w h i c h , in the light of
and mechanical engineering and scale of production, but, given the w h a t is said earlier, is more ap-
o t h e r s ) ; paper is made out of pulp. technique, a range of levels of out- propriate than Jagdish Bhagwati's
The relevant v a r i a b l e t o " consider, put where average cost w o u l d be a suggestion of Government selling
m i n i m u m a n d about constant. it is pre-determined project reports to
therefore, is not the final product
o n l y w h e n a size change involves a prospective industrialists. In many
(in which alone consumers and
technical b r e a k - t h r o u g h or, parti- cases, it is the industrialist who
theoretical economists appear to be
c u l a r l y in chemical plants, oppor- does not w a n t a large licence be-
interested), but the economies of the
tunities f o r r e c o v e r i n g materials or cause he is new, or does not have
sub-products w h i c h , even when they
use of bye-products, that one enters large resources, or is not sure of
go into the same f i n a l product,
a horizon of a new cost level ( a g a i n , the m a r k e t . Unlike what Jagdish
w o u l d differ f o r each sub-product.
w i t h possibly constant costs over a B h a g w a t i states, instances of the
In the case of the car, the tyres,
r a n g e ) a n d there is no reason w h y Government imposing a smaller
the batteries and the electrical
such changes should a l w a y s involve capacity on an industrialist are
system a r e almost a l w a y s separately
an increase in scale. r a r e r than those of industrialists
organised as m a n u f a c t u r i n g orga-
a s k i n g f o r s m a l l e r capacity licences
nisms. In a r e f r i g e r a t o r , the cabi- T h i s is the o n l y reason w h y in
(and not because, as Jagdish
n e t - m a k i n g and compressor manu- the same i n d u s t r y or f o r the same
Bhagwati states, they fear the
facture are industrially distinct product, there exist, a n d survive in
Government w i l l not g r a n t them
activities. Pulp-manufacture need a competing w o r l d , plants of v a r y i n g
licences f o r a l a r g e r c a p a c i t y ) .
not a l w a y s be deemed an essential sizes. In the ease of cars, f o r ex-
constituent of a paper-maker's job. ample, the scales of operation on The logic of s m a l l plants lies not
There is, therefore, a l w a y s a case the European continent are m u c h in Government's desire to prevent
f o r vertical o r horizontal disinte- s m a l l e r t h a n in the U S A . So also monopoly as Jagdish Bhagwati
g r a t i o n of i n d u s t r y in I n d i a , as at in the case of r e f r i g e r a t o r s . And argues as in an attempt to decentra-
present constituted. If a r e t h i n k i n g in pulp m a n u f a c t u r e , it is not cer- lise the i n d u s t r i a l effort. This, of
of policy is to be done, the lines of t a i n that costs v a r y significantly as course, raises another dilemma :
between levels of production r a n g - should a g i v e n target be distributed
r e - t h i n k i n g w o u l d need to have a
tng f r o m 30.000 tons a year to among a small number of large
much wider horizon than those
100,000 tons. plants (as favoured by Jagdish
suggested by J a g d i s h Bhagwati —
covering each industrial produci Industrialists W a n t Small Plants B h a g w a t i ) or a m o n g a large n u m -
a n d its impact on the i n d u s t r i a l and J a g d i s h B a g w a t i is w o r r i e d about ber of s m a l l plants? T h i s is a pro
o r g a n i s a t i o n a l structure of i n d u s t r y the issue of i n d u s t r i a l licences in- blem of inter-temporal adjustment
in India. v o l v i n g s m a l l (uneconomic) plants of plant size : whether the process
1487
THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY
September 15, 1962
1488